Can you report someone Single Person Council Tax Discount fraud?

[runningman1]

What if the co owner currently living in the place also knew some thuggish types who came down and kicked the poo out of the mates you arranged to come down?

 

Then that would be assault Mafya. If it was proven that the co owner arranged it then a custodial sentence would likely be forthcoming. This would actually solve the problem.

[999tigger]

Everyone defecates. Why do you think this would be a reason to get evicted. "Defendant, it is my judgement that you shall be removed from the property because you poo. This is a disgusting habit, if you mend your ways and never poo again you may stay".

 

It would be incredibly stupid to ever admit the intention was to drive the other person to sell the property.

 

I am not "getting into fantasy" this happened relatively recently, with a house in Meerbrook.

 

It would be for the judge to decide when considering the injunction. The fact they were in dispute and the person in residence had not granted as well as opposed this persons presence would all be taken into account. the fact the co owner is not living there and hasnt fro five years would be relevant as well. the judge would make their own mind up about what the intentions of the person was.

 

I dont know the facts of meersbrook as this case is about the OPs situation. I still think its highly unlikely on the given circumstances the owner wouldnt be granted an injunction.

 

---------- Post added 13-02-2016 at 15:28 ----------

 

Then that would be assault Mafya. If it was proven that the co owner arranged it then a custodial sentence would likely be forthcoming. This would actually solve the problem.

 

No it wouldnt. he'd still own the property.

[Cyclone]

I think you presume the CPS would be in the slightest bit interested in this tat - they may be, given the dross they continue to authorise charging and on occasions press on regardless with.

 

They would seek to keep the case in the magistrates - you would elect trial.

Do not expect a queue of briefs for your case !

 

Someone removes the entire contents of a house and you think the CPS might not prosecute?

 

---------- Post added 13-02-2016 at 17:39 ----------

 

What court in the land would serve an injunction against one of the joint owners of the premises from having guests?

 

Owner that isn't resident and won't be there when the "guests" are present... Most courts I'd think.

 

---------- Post added 13-02-2016 at 17:40 ----------

 

What about the rights of the other person to legally enjoy their home by having guests? It may be childish but sometimes being mature isn't the best option.

 

It will be costly and difficult to force a sale. It is likely that our dehomed friend would be unable to afford the legal costs.

 

They don't live there, it isn't their home.

[Orzel]

Anything else just sounds like revenge for the sake of it and doesn't get her nearer a solution. Can totally understand the desire to cause mischief though.

Problem is as mentioned before peaceful attempts already failed.

Guy clearly thinks that the house is his and wishes to keep that situation as it is.

Asserting your position is quite important and can resolve that situation without need for paying solicitor fees and such.

There is no solution without some form of confrontation. By definition that is impossible if two parties have opposite interests.

So confrontation is a must.

If that confrontation

[...] would be possible to make his life very difficult and expensive without breaking the law.[...]

then too bad for him.

I personally would stick to demanding keys.

If that demand fails break locks, demand keys for new locks.

Rinse and repeat until gentleman understands that he is not sole owner of property.

Peaceful resolution should be way easier then.

[999tigger]

Problem is as mentioned before peaceful attempts already failed.

Guy clearly thinks that the house is his and wishes to keep that situation as it is.

Asserting your position is quite important and can resolve that situation without need for paying solicitor fees and such.

There is no solution without some form of confrontation. By definition that is impossible if two parties have opposite interests.

So confrontation is a must.

If that confrontation

 

then too bad for him.

I personally would stick to demanding keys.

If that demand fails break locks, demand keys for new locks.

Rinse and repeat until gentleman understands that he is not sole owner of property.

Peaceful resolution should be way easier then.

 

If you read the thread , then he knows and doesnt dispute he isnt the sole owner.

She is entitled to be able to enter , so she cna ask for keys or break in if needs be.

She cant then in turn deny him entry.

The answer is an order for Sale as thats the only way she can sell without his consent and thats the aim.

[Orzel]

If you read the thread , then he knows and doesnt dispute he isnt the sole owner.

She is entitled to be able to enter , so she cna ask for keys or break in if needs be.

She cant then in turn deny him entry.

The answer is an order for Sale as thats the only way she can sell without his consent and thats the aim.

 

So my point is - assert your position, then order of sale might not be necessary at all.

He might consent to sale if confronted.

But that needs stronger position followed by persuasion.

[999tigger]

So my point is - assert your position, then order of sale might not be necessary at all.

He might consent to sale if confronted.

But that needs stronger position followed by persuasion.

 

If you read the thread hr's spent 5 years stringing it out. Whilst you are more sensible than Gamstons suggestions (which stray into the regions of illegality) what will you do when he agrees then changes his mind at the crucial time?

 

In respect of the OP, shes already spent a long time chasing him, doesnt like confrontation and tbh I cant think of much you can legally do that would get him to change his mind. I would assert myself by following the legal procedures put aside for this situation.

[redfox]

Someone removes the entire contents of a house and you think the CPS might not prosecute?

 

 

When you have the slightest clue about how they operate and on what basis they authorise charge then I would not spout such ill informed (yet claiming to be an authority) crap

[Andbreathe]

you want to grass someone up ?

 

You're such a technocrat.

 

To the op...go see a solicitor and get legal advice.

[Isabelle]

Everyone defecates. Why do you think this would be a reason to get evicted. "Defendant, it is my judgement that you shall be removed from the property because you poo. This is a disgusting habit, if you mend your ways and never poo again you may stay".

 

It would be incredibly stupid to ever admit the intention was to drive the other person to sell the property.

 

I am not "getting into fantasy" this happened relatively recently, with a house in Meerbrook.

 

Thanks, that made me giggle, I'm in rather a stressful situation at the moment so any light relief is welcome

 

I have requested keys, and he is currently refusing on the grounds that I haven't paid the mortgage. I've told him he can't deny me access, we'll see what happens....